Mrs. Sharon Hodgson (Gateshead, East and Washington, West) (Lab): It is a great privilege to be able to speak on young people's participation in democracy. There are a number of reasons why it is so difficult to engage young people in the democratic process, but I do not believe that apathy is one of them.

In a recent survey, nine out of 10 young people identified three or more of what could be considered political issues that really mattered to them and that they wanted the Government to address. That is hardly apathetic. The same survey found that 72 per cent. of 18 to 24-year-olds would vote if they believed a politician would listen to their priorities and keep their promises about those priorities. By contrast, only 20 per cent. said they were too apathetic to vote. Nearly double—almost 40 per cent.—said they did not vote because in their opinion the parties' policies were too alike. I think we all agree that young people are not apathetic; they just do not always understand how politics impacts on their life and how they can make a difference in political terms—to particular policies—just by voting.

The majority of young people do not vote. Therefore, older people have a greater impact on elections. As a consequence, politicians tend to work for older voters, and younger voters become less committed, so even fewer of them vote; the situation is like ever-decreasing circles. Young people do not vote because they feel they are not listened to. That is a circular argument, because if more young people voted, their positions would become much more important to politicians and Governments. When less than 40 per cent. of young people vote in a general election, compared with voter turnout of almost 70 per cent. for those over 55, it is hardly surprising that older voters' concerns are prioritised. I will come on to the issue of whether the voting age should be 16 later, because I think that that is one way in which we could address the issue of making politicians take more notice of the concerns of young people.

A lack of engagement and a low voting turnout among young people is a particular problem in the north-east, such as in my constituency. During the last general election, the north-east had the second lowest turnout of that category of voters. The lack of young people's participation in democracy is compounded in the north-east by the fact that those in the poorest sections of our society are less engaged. Young people from such backgrounds are even less likely to vote and to be engaged than those from other sections of society; 15 per cent. fewer young people from the poorest sections vote, compared with those from the wealthiest sections.

What are the solutions? Young people need to be shown that one person—namely, they—can make a difference if they try. Everyone in this room believes that; that is why we all entered politics. As has been said, young people are involved in activism outside the normal party spectrum, but it is our responsibility, as their representatives, to show them that their concerns matter to us.

I recently met a student from Sunderland university who was campaigning to retain the student discounts on public transport, which are currently under threat because of a transport funding shortfall to pay for free bus travel for pensioners. That is an unintended consequence. On Monday night, I went to see the Prime Minister about it as part of a delegation of Tyne and Wear MPs, and we hope that it will be rectified. That young female student came to see me, as her MP, to put her views across on a one-to-one basis. It could be said that she was already engaged to an extent because she was at college, but, none the less, she came on her own, and I have a lot of respect for her for doing that.

We need to focus on the issues that matter to young people and to ask what they are. We cannot assume that we remember what they are because we were once young, because even if we remember what they were then, it is very likely that the main issues are different now. As the hon. Member for East Dunbartonshire (Jo Swinson) said, even though she is the youngest Member in the House she does not have experience of paying tuition fees. That is just one example of the changing issues.

We need to ask young people what the important issues are. They might mention their employment prospects, the costs and benefits of higher education, or how they can afford to buy their first home. It is difficult to engage with young people, but I believe that the way to do so is to hold youth surgeries. When we knock on people's doors, it is usually the parents who come to speak to us. Even if a younger person answers the door, they do not want to stay standing there for a second; they quickly go away saying, "I'll get me mam," or, "I'll get me dad."

I find that visiting young people in schools is the best way to engage with them. However, there might be between 10 and 30 of them, depending on whether the situation involves a group or a whole class, and some of

them will not engage. The usual suspects will ask all the questions and want to know things and, because of the nature of situations like that, others will stay quiet. Therefore, there can only be real engagement on a one-to-one basis, and surgeries offer a way to do that. I have started working to set that up with a national organisation called Changemakers. It has a regional office in Newcastle.

With regard to the citizenship education agenda, can I recommend to all Members in the House the "Democracy Cookbook" from the Electoral Commission? It is excellent. I do not know if any Members have come across the publication, but I commend the Electoral Commission for the time, money and effort it invested in producing it. Whoever was behind it obviously had their finger on the pulse, because it is very good. I was so enthused by it that I sent off for a number of copies. I was told that I could be sent only 12, but that any school that wanted some could apply to the Electoral Commission directly and it would send up to 30 per school. I received 12 copies and as I have five secondary schools and one college on my patch, I had the brilliant idea on Friday to drive around with my researcher and drop them all off. I thought I would have a quick five-minute chat and drop all the cookbooks in and explain the benefit of them.

Not long after I was elected, I wrote to all the secondary and primary schools on my patch offering to go along and take part in any discussions on democracy, citizenship lessons or question and answer sessions on a Friday or any day during September when we are in recess. I said, "You just plan it, ring my office and organise it." However, nothing happened; none of them approached me. Therefore, I decided to go along and meet them in person and say, "I come bearing gifts and I am a normal person, so please invite me in." It did not take just five minutes per school, especially as it was the week immediately after the Education and Inspections Bill debate. My researcher was saying, "Sharon, are you sure this is a good idea?" I said, "It's a fantastic idea." It took every minute of an entire day. The schools were shutting and the children were leaving when I was running into the last school. The offer I made still stands.

I will send all those schools a copy of this debate and I would be happy to go along and engage with their young people. I want the young people themselves to organise these youth surgeries in their schools and I will go along and have 10-minute appointments. A group of pupils could organise the youth surgeries; that is what I envisage. I hope very much that that happens.

We also need to think about new ways to vote and, as the Chancellor recently suggested, we should also consider lowering the voting age to 16. I support that. It would build excitement about voting if it were linked with citizenship education in the right way. Children in schools are being taught about citizenship, voting, what it means and how they can impact on the process. There is engagement with local politicians, councillors and MPs. The relevance is there and lowering the age would build up impetus and excitement as children turn 16 and elections take place. Some children would be eligible to vote in the May election and others would not, but it would be something that everyone would want to do. I hope that it would stay with them and develop into a good habit when they left school. They say that voting habits come with age. Hence, more people over 55 vote. It becomes habit forming.

If all children stayed on at school until 18, they would still not develop the habit. It must be linked to citizenship education. Even if children receive the education and become enthused by voting, there is still a two-year gap for a large number of young people, because not all children stay on at school until 18. I support voting at 16.

The YMCA worked with hard-to-reach young people, and Alison Dean, from YMCA England's working with young people unit, gave oral evidence to the Power commission. She highlighted the skills gap:

"Those who are hardest-to-reach may have difficulties around literacy, communications and expressing their own opinions, so they would not be able to engage in any formal kind of communication or dialogue that would demonstrate that they had an interest in politics."

Young people fear being out of their depth or making a fool of themselves. They have a high level of self-consciousness, which is detrimental to their finding out information. Once they have left school, if they have had a couple of years thinking, "I don't understand and it's too late to ask now," they get to 18, 19 or 20 and they do not want to be embarrassed and ask, "How do I go about voting?" So, 16 is probably a good age at which to catch them before they become too self-conscious. It just becomes a habit: they go along to the polling station with their parents and they have mock polling stations in school. They understand what to do when they go into that little box with the pencil on a string, and they understand how it all works.

Evidence from Germany and Austria has shown that youth turnout greatly increases when the voting age is reduced. In Vienna, the youth participation rate was 90 per cent.—a very interesting statistic.

Justine Greening : I just want to clarify whether Austria has voting at 16. I think it is at 18, but if I am wrong perhaps the hon. Lady will correct me. I thought that the age was reduced to 18, and that is my query.

Mrs. Hodgson : The hon. Lady may be correct. However, my notes say "votes at 16". I shall have to ask the YMCA for clarification, because when it mentions Vienna, it does not actually say "at 16", so the paragraph could be misleading.

We must make voter registration easier, but we do not need to introduce individual registration as the Opposition have suggested. The YMCA and others believe that household registration is a barrier to young people who move frequently. I disagree, because any individual can register at any time when they move. One does not have to wait for the form. Again, it is an awareness issue. The vast majority of disengaged young people still live at home and they benefit from household registration, as their parents complete the form on behalf of the whole household. I am opposed to individual registration for that reason.

I agree that reducing the candidacy age to 18 would be positive and help to attract younger candidates. However, I realise that just because somebody can stand at 18, does not mean that there will be any 18-year-old MPs. It is about sending out the right message. Although reducing the candidacy age would be a positive move, life experience is important in this House. An 18-year-old MP would have only a limited amount of life experience. At 21, one has a bit more.

Jo Swinson : Does not the hon. Lady accept that if enough voters in a particular constituency feel that a candidate, of whatever age, has enough life experience to represent them, the final decision should lie with them?

Mrs. Hodgson : That is right. It may explain why even though the candidacy age is 21, there have been no 21-year-old MPs for a long time. The hon. Lady alludes to the fact that the choice should rest with the electorate.

Justine Greening : We are getting into a conundrum: on the one hand, getting more people involved at a younger age is to be welcomed; on the other hand, people very much dislike politicians who have spent their career in Parliament, never having worked in the real world, paid a mortgage, gone home, got up, gone to work, gone to the office, come home, paid the mortgage and so on. There is a contradiction, but as the hon. Member for East Dunbartonshire (Jo Swinson) says, it is up to voters to decide what they prioritise.

Mrs. Hodgson : Again, that is a valid point. We could probably debate that point alone for some time. When I came into politics and decided to stand for public life, it was because I believed that I had a lifetime's worth of relatable experience to offer. Owing to my 20 years of work before I came to Parliament, I have qualities and skills from a long background in many different sectors. It will always provide a balance. However, I take the point made by the hon. Member for East Dunbartonshire: it is up to the electorate to decide.

The Government should consult regularly with young people on a range of issues, as they did with the Green Paper, "Youth Matters", on which there were 19,000 submissions. It showed that young people want to be heard. One good thing that came out of it was the youth opportunities card. I do not know how many pilots there will be, but I am pleased that the card is being piloted in my constituency. I shall follow it with great interest.

Both local authorities in my constituency will receive money from the youth opportunity fund. Perhaps the Minister will clarify whether it is a national scheme. The guidance for local authorities says that they are to consult with young people on how the fund is spent. From the figures I received, they have about £400,000 to spend from the fund. I have raised the matter with both authorities and I shall follow with great interest the ways in which they decide to spend the money. I hope that they will follow the guidance and consult young people.

I commend the work that organisations such as the YMCA and Changemakers do with young people. In particular, I commend the YMCA for offering training, campaigning and lobbying skills through the "Changing Your World" programme. It brings young people, often YMCA residents, to London to learn about Parliament and the possibilities that political action offers. Changemakers works on a wide range of programmes, including YSpeak. That programme encourages young people to be advocates for one another and to take up issues and campaigns. I visited the office of that organisation in Newcastle and met a number of the young people involved. It impressed me how much they had benefited, both socially and educationally, from involvement with such an organisation.

Political engagement is a natural progression from that. When young people get involved with such an organisation or activity, they realise that politics matters and impacts on everything. There were clever television adverts from the Electoral Commission encouraging engagement, but it is often when people see for themselves the impact of politics that they get involved. The Minister said that often when young people meet politicians and realise that we are real people, their opinions of us change. The media have much to answer for. Their portrayal of politicians involves lots of stereotypes, most of which are untrue. Sadly, some of them are true.

One reason why I wanted to get into politics was that I did not feel that there was anyone like me in politics. I do not know whether people in this Chamber would agree with that. I am a working-class woman from Gateshead. In the north-east, there are not many women MPs. I am the only woman MP in Tyne and Wear, which has 13 seats. The north-east probably has 60 or 70 seats in total and the number of women MPs has increased from four to six. The north-east has been a bastion of male dominance over the years. It was an industrial area and I suppose that male dominance in that respect followed through into politics.

The women who broke through were amazing. We can see how Mo Mowlam got here. Hilary Armstrong is our Chief Whip. Vera Baird broke through in 2001. She followed—

Mr. Edward O'Hara (in the Chair): Order. The hon. Lady should refer to hon. Members by their constituency.

Mrs. Hodgson : I apologise, Mr. O'Hara. Women who have become MPs in the north-east have been quite memorable and are still active in their roles. However, I could see no one like me in politics, especially in the north-east. That encouraged me to get into politics. I believe that MPs should be representative, in many ways, of the people they represent. I am referring to ethnic and cultural background and so on. I strove to provide that representation and, lo and behold, I am here, which I am very pleased about.

Today I received a delegation from the Gateshead young women's outreach project. I met six women and two youth workers. They came down to Parliament and sat in the Gallery for questions to my hon. Friend the Minister for Women and Equality, which they found fascinating. Indeed, the whole experience has been great for them. They are mothers of school age but are not in school for various reasons, but usually because they have been bullied. They receive support relating to education, being healthy and safe, achieving and contributing and, eventually, becoming economically independent. Those 16 and 17-year-old girls said to me, "When you were our age, did you know you wanted to be an MP? Did you know this is what you wanted to do?" The answer was no — far from it. Life experience led me to want to become an MP. I hope that I can be a role model for those women and other women throughout the country. I hope that they will see that people do not have to be in a certain mould or of a certain type to follow a certain path. Life is what you make it. People can do anything they want to if they put their mind to it.